The spinal column is made up of a set of superimposed vertebrae connected to each other by fibrocartilaginous discs, called intervertebral discs. These intervertebral discs play a fundamental role in the statics and dynamics of the spinal column: they ensure the mobility of the vertebrae with respect to one another.
These intervertebral discs are often subject to disorders relative to compression of vertebrae, herniated discs, vertebral movement, or intervertebral arthrosic degeneration. These disorders are most often a source of pain or functional bother not responding to medical treatment; in some cases, they may even be incapacitating.
The methods used to soothe patients suffering from these disorders may consist of a surgical operation seeking to replace the damaged disc with an intervertebral disc prosthesis.
The implantation of such an intervertebral disc prosthesis may be done using different approaches in particular depending on the anatomy of the patient. There are three main approaches for the L1/L2 to L5/S1 lumbar stages, namely:                the retroperitoneal anterior approach, generally possible for all lumbar stages, but which may sometimes present difficulties due to the presence of veins and arteries,        the lateral approach, possible for all lumbar stages except L5/S1, which is statistically one of the stages most often needing the implantation of a prosthesis, due to the bother caused by the presence of the iliac wings,        the anterolateral approach, which is possible for all lumbar stages, but requires a more difficult oblique prosthesis placement path.        
Document WO 2010/094881 describes an intervertebral disc prosthesis comprising first and second plates, each fixed on one of the two vertebrae adjacent to the vertebral disc to be replaced, between which a compression pad is positioned. Each plate includes, on the inner face thereof, two cavities emerging in the anterior face of the corresponding plate and positioned on either side of the anteroposterior plane of said plate, the cavities of the first plate being arranged to be situated across from the cavities of the second plate so as to form two hollows making it possible to attach a gripper-impactor and implant the prosthesis using the anterior approach.
The prosthesis described in document WO 2010/094881 does not allow implantation using the lateral approach, and only allows implantation using the anterolateral approach for very experienced surgeons. As a result, when veins and arteries make it complicated to perform the implantation using the anterior approach, a surgeon having a prosthesis similar to that described in document WO 2010/094881 is often forced, in place of that intervertebral disc prosthesis, to implant an intervertebral arthrodesis using the anterior approach. The implantation of such an arthrodesis involves fusing two vertebrae adjacent to the damaged disc. The main drawback of this method is that it eliminates all mobility between the two vertebrae adjacent to the damaged disc, and therefore concentrates the mechanical stresses on the adjacent intervertebral discs, which can cause a risk of deterioration of their articular surface.
In order to avoid implanting such an arthrodesis when the anterior approach is not possible, it is known to provide surgeons with an intervertebral disc prosthesis having attaching means arranged to cooperate with complementary attaching means of a gripper-impactor, the attaching means formed on the prosthesis being designed so as to allow gripping of the prosthesis in a latero-lateral direction using a gripper-impactor, and therefore to implant the prosthesis using the lateral approach.
Thus, in order to allow a surgeon to implant an intervertebral disc prosthesis on a patient using different approaches, it is necessary to provide the latter with at least two lines of prostheses, namely a first line of prostheses of different sizes adapted for implantation using the anterior approach and a second line of prostheses of different sizes adapted for implantation using the lateral approach, as well as a plurality of ancillaries adapted for placing said prostheses.
This high number of prostheses and ancillaries complicates the storage thereof and increases the costs related thereto. Furthermore, this high number of disc prostheses complicates the handling of the latter by the operating personnel, and makes the operating gesture more complicated.
This results in a large number of prostheses and ancillaries to be provided to the surgeon, which makes the operating gesture more complex.
It should be noted that the approach selection planned by the surgeon before the operation may be modified during the operation, due to the presence of tissues making the placement of the prosthesis using the approach initially selected complex.
In this scenario, a new prosthesis must be selected from the line of prostheses suitable for implantation using the approach selected by the surgeon during the operation, and the initially selected prosthesis must be discarded, which also increases the operating time and the costs of the surgical operation.
Furthermore, the selection of a new prosthesis requires the use of a new ancillary, which increases the number of ancillaries to be sterilized after the surgical operation.